Quoting Quiverfull: Breed to Out-Breed Brown People?

Quoting Quiverfull: Breed to Out-Breed Brown People? September 17, 2017

by Ayla Stewart of Wife With A Purpose on her Twitter feed page

Editor’s note: Remember Ayla? She of the Mormon church that was scheduled to speak at the rally in Charlottesville that turned deadly? She’s been in the media for awhile now for her claims of white supremacy being ‘Godly’ THIS idea of hers that the main reason for Quiverfull is to make sure we have more White Christians than brown scary people has been echoed by QF royalty like Nancy Campbell and Michael and Debi Pearl. Ayla is just open with her racism.

There’s quite an article about her beliefs at WheatandTares.org – Wife With A Purpose: Mormonism’s Alt Right Representative

whitebabychallenge.png
Screencap of Ayla Stewart’s Twitter page

This is the real reason behind the Quiverfull movement. It’s not the Bible, it’s not scripture, it’s veiled, or not so veiled racism.

 

moreRead more by Ayla Stewart

Everyone Comes From Slaves

QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders, cultural enforcers and those that seek to keep women submitted to men and ask our readers: What do you think? Agree? Disagree? This is the place to state your opinion. Please, let’s keep it respectful – but at the same time, we encourage readers to examine the ideas of Quiverfull and Spiritual Abuse honestly and thoughtfully.

 


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Tawreos

    I am amazed at how often I get the feeling I would have to write a book encompassing many volumes to properly express my feelings for something someone like her says in a tweet.

  • Dom S

    Well, this isn’t disgustingly racist or awful and inhumane at all. Would love to see the reaction of their kids’ faces when they’re grown and they find out they were only born to spite the fact that, oh my goodness, brown people have kids too…

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9366434c51e6700033c7ef7b78efa29b8d597ddf82e2af7c45b943ebefb7a5ff.gif

  • SAO

    The thing I find amazing about the fundamentalist Christians is how unChristian they are. It seems like they missed the entire point of Christ.

    People who still go to mainstream churches still view religion as preached by their church, but as you drift away from a church or regular church-going, your view of religion is increasingly colored by the Osteens who close their churches when people need shelter, by the prayer meetings in the oval office, by the defenses of ‘men of God’ caught sexually abusing the vulnerable, etc.

    It’s telling to me that business leaders on Trump’s economic advisory committee and cultural leaders on his arts council all quit in protest over the idea that there were “very fine people” peacefully protesting the removal of confederate statues in the same crowd as the people shouting Nazi slogans. But the religious leaders didn’t quit and they didn’t piss off Trump, either, which would have happened if they’d actually shown some moral leadership.

  • Dom S

    If anything, the fact that people can take the “entire point of Christ” to mean anything they personally want it to mean, that pretty much renders Christ irrelevant in that equation, doesn’t it? That is to say, the only point of Christ is that there is no point.

  • paganheart

    Exactly. I believe one of He Who Shall Not Be Named’s religious advisors did resign out of disgust over his Charlottesville response, but the rest remain, and the rest are all white men (and a handful of white women.) I grew up Southern Baptist, and racism was rampant; families of color rarely came to our church, and when they did, they were not made to feel welcome. The rest of the the world is starting to figure out what some of us knew all along: there is basically no daylight between white supremacy and fundie Christianity, of any flavor. Wonder how this Ayla chick feels about the fact that most LDS converts come from Latin America and the Pacific Island nations these days?

  • This will end one way, the quiverfull movement will literally inbreed themselves into oblivion. Only available women will be ones born into this cult as very few outsiders want anything do do with this.

  • Petticoat Philosopher

    Eh, the mainstream church people aren’t always so great either. Don’t get me wrong, I just spent a flight from Boston to Chicago talking to a retired Presbyterian minister and his retired-teacher-current-women’s-shelter-volunteer wife and they’d been active in basically every social justice movement they’d been alive for–which is many, given that they are in their 80s. They were awesome.

    But lots of mainline Christians believe and do pretty problematic things too and certainly don’t do much to speak out against fundamentalism. We need to stop coddling Christianity. If you identify as a Christian, you are one; it is the only definition that makes sense. It’s high time folks faced the fact that being a Christian does not stop you from being an asshole, something that people who have been oppressed by Christians have known for a while. The Right-wing fundies in this country are as Christian as that lovely couple I met in the plane. It’s just that that couple are much better human beings, so of course their Christianity is more kind and generous and just.

  • Petticoat Philosopher

    It’s gonna get awkward when the majority of the laity are not white but the powerful are still wrangling to keep the leadership as white as it is now.

  • Petticoat Philosopher

    Religions are only as good as the people practicing them, after all. Christianity is not magical.

  • Anonyme

    “All babies are gifts from God. Except the non-white ones and/or those from non-Christian families”
    Also, “match or beat mine”? These are children, not dolls.

  • Dom S

    Right?! Like, are we talking about human beings or Pokemon trading cards? But somehow LGBT people are the ones “devaluing” relationships and the act of procreation. Seriously…

  • bekabot

    I think the smarter people involved in the subculture realize that, and are desperately trying to expand, even if it’s only in terms of sheer numbers, before the crunch comes.

  • bekabot

    Bad ideas are often pithy. It takes time and space and leisure to figure out and explicate everything that’s wrong with them, which is a disadvantage in a sound-bite age when everybody’s busy.

  • Lucy

    Speaking of Pokemon, the (good) trainers in the Pokemon series don’t devalue their Pokemon nearly as much as this mom devalued her kids – they do try to catch as many Pokemon as possible, but that is not the main focus and they are supposed to develop trust too – the Pokemon series emphasizes those values more heavily than catching the most Pokemon. And the trainers that do devalue their Pokemon that much consist of a couple of known jerks who are portrayed as such and mostly outright criminals who capture anyone’s Pokemon regardless of whether or not they have already been claimed. And even some of the criminals don’t always do that with all their Pokemon; sometimes the Pokemon are equally involved in the crime, and equally culpable, the most notable example of the latter being Team Rocket’s talking Meowth.

  • John Wayne Eastwoo

    Mormons are not fundamental Christians and have always been thought that whites are the superior race.

    “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so” (Journal of Discourses 10:109).

  • Lucy

    Then there are pithy ideas that do have some good aspects to them, but can and will have horrible applications when used. For example “You get what you get and you don’t throw a fit”. That idea is great – if you are trying to have kids not to have tantrums to get something they want that they can’t have and shouldn’t, and if that’s all that idea could potentially imply. However, in reality this pithy saying can also have a number of very bad implications. One is “be grateful for whatever I give you even if it’s less than you need”, so this idea could be disastrous coming from a child of a neglectful parent, who will use that saying as a mantra not to even ask for anything; if by throwing a fit you mean intentionally throwing a tantrum, that’s one thing, but “throw a fit” can easily be conflated with asking calmly and negotiating; some people regard any complaint at all as “throwing a fit”. Which brings me to my next implication. This is what it would do to marginalized people – they might hear that saying and hear “I should be grateful for whatever you deign to give me, don’t protest (as protests are sometimes considered fits) and keep your head down and don’t look for anything else, even if it’s a chance of less discrimination in the future, that we are not willing to give you”. Then, there is the implication for disabled people. Disabled people often are denied accommodations they should have, and they are thought of as demanding special treatment when they ask for accommodations. Also, autistic meltdowns and other such reactions, while they are not intentional tantrums, are often treated as such. So a disabled person will hear “You get what you get and you don’t throw a fit” as “You’ll get the same things your non-disabled peers get, you won’t get accommodations, and you won’t complain about not getting them, and so what if you need more accommodation than your non-disabled peers? You get what everyone else gets and none of the extras you need, and you won’t complain, you won’t protest, and you won’t have a meltdown or similar reaction – maybe you won’t have a seizure, either, depending on how merciful I am” Never mind that disabled people need accommodations abled people don’t, and reactions like meltdowns are largely beyond one’s control – you may have some options once you hit the meltdown threshold, but none of them are pleasant and all of them carry a risk of getting in trouble – either you have the meltdown or you shut down and compromise your functioning in other areas. And if you have a self-injury impulse or screaming fit or something else, once you release the meltdown, the emotion’s gotta go somewhere, it’s only a question of what you hit or scream at, not whether you do either. And if you’re in meltdown mode, deep breaths don’t work either. They can work after a meltdown, but not during. And deep breaths don’t stop you from crying, either, especially if your urge to cry is intense, since crying and sadness, unlike anger and fear, is controlled by the “rest-and-digest” nervous system, the same system that is engaged when you do deep breaths. And, for extra fun, meltdowns can vary in their intensity. The most intense ones are like emotional vomit, emotional projectile vomit if you’re really unlucky – they come out right now, and the most you can do is hope they don’t hit something you especially don’t want to hit.

  • bekabot

    So a disabled person will hear ‘You get what you get and you don’t throw a fit’ as ‘You’ll get the same things your non-disabled peers get, you won’t get accommodations, and you won’t complain about not getting them, and so what if you need more accommodation than your non-disabled peers? You get what everyone else gets and none of the extras you need, and you won’t complain, you won’t protest, and you won’t have a meltdown or similar reaction – maybe you won’t have a seizure, either, depending on how merciful I am’

    To women, especially women of fertile age: “You’ll get exactly what you’re male peers get, whether you can use it or not. You wanted everything to be fifty-fifty, didn’t you? Well, this is our interpretation of what that is, so we’ll just see how much all that equality you kept squalling about does you, haw haw. When you say you want birth control we’ll hand out condoms, but at the same time we’ll do our best to restrict the prescriptions for pills, because pills cause abortions — the way we know that they do is that somebody somewhere worries that they might. Oh yeah, we’re all in favor of fair and balanced treatment, really and truly we are, haw haw haw.”

  • Almost a chimp

    Outbreeding the opposition to gain an advantage is not a new thing, of course.
    Does anybody think that the Catholic and Islamic bans on contraception are really about respecting the curiously identical wishes of Jaweh and Allah in this one matter when so much more of the respective religions’ beliefs run counter to each other?
    It’s all about making more Catholics and more Muslims in a mad attempt to have their religions the one true religion around the world, or in this case, more white people to keep those pesky sons and daughters of Cain in their place.

    It is telling that Cain’s punishment for killing his brother was to make him black rather than Middle-Eastern brown.
    It’s also deliciously ironic that white people (if Mediterranean Greeks and Romans are even considered white by the standards of the white supremacists) are typically the enemies of the Christian God in the Bible, whilst the Western European whites that were the ancestors of American Christian white supremacists don’t even seem to exist in scripture, even though they seem to believe that Christianity is the religion of the white race.

  • SAO

    I wonder if prohibitions on ‘miscengenation’ began during slavery, when it was generally a white man and a slave woman who had no right to say no? It makes sense for people to feel disgust at men who exploit those in their power. Aside from the wrong done to the raped slave women, men who do anything they can get away with, often think they can cheat you, as Trump investors, employees, voters and the entire country has discovered.

    Then, once the taboo is in place, it lasts long after it is useful.

  • AFo

    This woman doesn’t deserve children. Motherhood shouldn’t be a pissing contest about who can have the most kids. And she’s sounding dangerously close to “master race”/Nazi talk here.

  • Lucy

    Yep. That’s another example, and yet another reason to really, really hate “You get what you get and you don’t throw a fit”.

    That saying, by the way, is one parents came up with fairly recently, and given all the horrible ways it can be interpreted, including the example you kindly supplied, that saying seriously needs to die in a fire ASAP.

    Really, let’s just stick to “don’t throw tantrums for the purpose of getting things you want” (with things you want meaning candy, toys, extra dessert, later bedtime, getting out of doing chores, etc.)” It’s a lot less lyrical and prophetic-sounding, but it’s on point, communicates what the parent who came up with that hell phrase originally intended to communicate, and there are far, far fewer ways that phrase can be used to further oppression (none, really, if protests and other such things are specifically excluded, along with calls of real distress that can’t be stopped, or crying for desperately needed things, or other things that are not tantrums but are often misinterpreted as such)

  • mordred

    Her poor children don’t deserve that mother!

  • Astrin Ymris

    I Googled this awhile back– apparently the phrase “You get what you get and you don’t pitch a fit” was coined by daycare workers to facilitate passing out popsicles or other non-identical treats. Even if there are enough red popsicles for everyone who wants one to have one, fishing through the box to fulfill special requests dramatically increases the time needed to serve the treat, and increases the wait time for the kids– which is never a good thing with toddlers and preschoolers. Add to that the drama and tears caused by running out of red popsicles… and you’ll see why the phrase was coined. A simple policy of “You’ll get whatever happens to be in my hand when I reach you; take it or leave it” prevents a lot of problems.

    TL;DR– This was invented as a pragmatic crowd control technique for use by people dealing with groups of children. It was never intended to be used as a weapon against marginalized people by the privileged.

  • Astrin Ymris

    This might be true if it weren’t for the “patriarchy” part of the Christian Patriarchy Movement. Young men have to apply to the young women’s father for the right to “enter into a courtship” with her. In some cultures she’ll be given the option to approve or refuse, but only AFTER the suitor in question has already gotten Daddy’s approval. If the father dislikes the young man for any reason, his daughter is never informed of the offer. Geoffrey Botkin, a big name in the CPM world, has never found anyone who came up to his standard for his two beautiful daughters, who are now both around thirty.

    Due to the belief that young women lose pieces of their hearts by having any romantic feelings for a young man before marriage, a courtship is pretty much expected to end in marriage. Some men feel that this is a big commitment to make for a woman they only know by sight… so instead of trying to go through “dragon fathers”, they decide to date “fundie lite” women and convert them.

    Thomas Umstattd, Jr. explains this problem very vividly from an in-group perspective:

    http://www.thomasumstattd.com/2014/08/courtship-fundamentally-flawed/

    Mind you, his objection isn’t that Courtship Culture is fundamentally abusive, just that it’s not working as expected to generate the huge numbers of happily-married CPM couples raising future Dominionist voters.

  • Astrin Ymris

    According to Fawn Brodie’s biography, Joseph Smith added the racism because he was trying to expand his movement into Missouri, which was slave territory, and the existing settlers were suspicious that the northern-born Mormon newcomers were abolitionists. Therefore, Joseph Smith was under pressure to distance his followers from the Abolition Movement, and he conveniently came up with some White Supremacist-like “revelations”.

    After moving the group’s headquarters into anti-slavery Illinois, Joseph began quietly downplaying his no-longer-useful racist proclamations. I’m sure that if he’d lived longer, he’d have come up with some new revelation to the effect that non-whites baptized into the LDS were “cleansed” of their pre-birth sin and were “spiritually white” now.

  • Kimberly Iorillo

    I figured when i started saying this phrase with my 2 toddlers that I couldn’t have been the first one to think it up. I mainly use it as a way to keep them from demanding a certain color bowl for cereal in the morning. And when we found out we were having girl #3 instead of boy #1, my oldest looked at her dad and said, “I know you wanted a boy, but you get what you get and you don’t throw a fit.” lol. Never would I use this phrase with anyone but my small children…

  • bekabot

    don’t throw tantrums for the purpose of getting things you want

    Don’t throw tantrums for the purpose of getting things you want, unless you’re the head of a household or the Chief Executive of a Western country. Then it’s okay.

    (Added: I’m not recommending this as a genuine rule to be be followed, just talking the language of the Christian Right. When the fit is on me I can’t stop.)

  • Lucy

    I figure that if you do use that phrase, it’s best to explicitly point out, at least once the kids reach a certain age, that this phrase only applies to delivery of fun treats, color of bowl, and other little things beyond the caretaker’s control, and that for bigger things, “throwing a fit”, or what people view as such (i.e. complaining, protesting) can be perfectly OK. And also to point out, again once the kid is old enough, that if there is an option they would prefer, it’s okay to tell you what they want, and if you can’t give it, you’ll let them know and you will give them their preference when you can. And of course, to actually give them their preference when you can. That would mitigate the damage the phrase can do.

  • Lucy

    Yes, unfortunately people do that.

    One thing. I did see that people used this as pragmatic crowd control. One thing I will say about that is, pragmatic crowd control sayings for small kids can easily be overapplied – even if someone else doesn’t use pragmatic crowd control phrases to silence kids (and adults), people who have been marginalized or abused can and will use pragmatic crowd control phrases they learned when young to silence themselves, especially if. I feel that such phrases are potentially effective in the short term, and can be really tempting to use for that reason, but can have long-term consequences for those who hear it. The way I see it, it’s best to minimize the use of such phrases, and where they need to be used, to explain the nuances, or where the phrase is appropriate and where it isn’t, when there is time and the kid can understand.

    The way I see it, if you do use pragmatic crowd control, the more specific it is to the situation at hand, the better; i.e. saying “You get the treat you get” and leaving off the “don’t throw a fit” part which can shame people who have meltdowns and may facilitate silencing later in life. I think that saying is sufficiently sing-songy with fewer ways in which it can go wrong – leave off the “don’t throw a fit” part, and what you are left with resembles societal messages that are much more easily refuted later in life. Sort of like “that’s the way the cookie crumbles” – pithy, not always pleasant to hear, but easily refuted when need be.

  • Lucy

    Actually I think “You get the treat you get” would be better – similarly pithy and singsong and easy to say, but easier to refute with nuances later in life and without anything that may later shame people for having meltdowns or giving righteous complaints. That saying is a cousin of the sayings “that’s the way the cookie crumbles”, or “C’est la vie” for adults, which are also useful for minor situations like the popsicle example but easily refuted in larger ones like failure to accommodate or marginalization. The “don’t throw a fit” part is unnecessary – it’s implied in “You get the treat you get”, which can be repeated if the kid complains – that trick won’t work for older, inquisitive kids, but these are toddlers, so that should suffice.

  • Lizard

    Something about this was really getting under my skin (besides the obvious) and you’ve put your thumb right on it. Children should not be born for contest or to spite others. It’s a ridiculously petty way to view a huge responsibility.

  • Saraquill

    The blond girls in green remind me of the cover of a 1940’s German magazine. Apparently the “Gretchen” look was promoted by the guys in charge at the time and women hated it.

  • B.A.

    That’s what I thought. I think it’s creepy.

  • Astrin Ymris

    Yes, but the little poem is fun to say! ;-D

    Seriously, the primary problem is the phrase’s appropriation by Austerity-minded politicos to justify stripping public services to give tax breaks to the wealthy. We need to push back hard against that and point out that it was coined to refer to the color of popsicles or cereal bowls, not denying essentials to people who need them.

    The jingle is already out there; it can’t be retrieved now. All we can do is provide the context at every opportunity.

  • bekabot

    One of the traits of Christian rightists is that they’re incapable of seeing scuffles over the exercise of power in any terms other than the ones proper to interfamilial squabbles, which is why they expect the quashing maneuvers parents use against kids to devastate fellow-adults.

    (It’s cute the way they’re always shocked — but genuinely shocked — when this doesn’t work.)

  • The entire system will collapse and evangelical dominion Christianity will crumble, the final end will happen FAST. You lose a little by little at a time then its all of a sudden. They will shrink to a critical number that will just not be enough to sustain anything. Its how the Ringling Bros circus died, ticket sales dropped to a point where it was no longer profitable and FELD just closed the entire thing.

  • The leadership will never change these rules despite they are not working, instead they will DOUBLE DOWN, it is what all dying businesses and organizations do. Blockbuster tried to NOT be Netflix while that company was grinding them into dust, Kmart hoped that crappy credit cards would be their salvation.

    Entire quiverfull movement just reeks of desperate magical thinking to save their doomed evangelical christian movement.

  • texassa

    This is not veiled racism.

  • adams12

    When I see this woman’s racism go unchallenged by the Mormon church and remember that they excommunicated Kelly for speaking out on women in the priesthood, It confirms every reason I resigned my membership. The hypocrisy is jaw dropping.

  • Almost a chimp

    Too true, the veil came off long ago.

  • Almost a chimp

    Hypocrisy in religion? I’m shocked; SHOCKED, I tells ya.

  • Astrin Ymris

    To an extent, you’re right. The fundgelical-run adoption agencies which whipped up the Rescue Adoption craze are declaring bankruptcy and boarding up, often with a lot of their clients’ money in their pockets. Gothard’s empire may be hit with a lot of sexual abuse lawsuits soon. The Pearls and Campbells may be losing hit count, and the Botkins’ fortunes may falter as their most valuable assets– Anna Sophia and Elizabeth– lose both street cred and market value as spokeswomen for Courtship Culture as they pass through their prime reproductive years unwed.

    But there is no single entity like Feld Entertainment which can make a decision to shutter the entire CPM. The “movement” is a bunch of independent businesses cooperating where their interests coincide but competing for “sales” otherwise. If the current “big names” go under, new upstarts who haven’t had time to acquire sex or financial scandals will pop up in a bid to capture the customer base.

    For the sake or argument, let’s say that the flock has grown disillusioned with the entire idea of Militant Fecundity for Christ in all possible iterations. That doesn’t mean that the fear, rage, and spite that fueled the movement will disappear. The election of Donald Trump shows that this White Privilege angst remains as strong– and vicious– as ever. As Clinton pointed out during the campaign, Trump mainstreamed hate… and all the “deplorables” came scuttling out from under the refrigerator into the light.

    TL;DR– the former CPM may be absorbed into white supremacist hate groups. They’ll probably move their energies from reproducing at Duggar-level intensities to reducing the numbers and powers of their “enemy” by more direct tactics. It may be a good thing that they’re dropping their mask of pious we-just-want-to-live-as-we-choose pacifism, but they will remain a very serious threat, and we disregard them at our peril.

  • Astrin Ymris

    Yes, my very liberal mainline sister– who’s an ordained minister in her denomination– does not even want to discuss the CPM with me. She keeps referring to them as a “fringe movement” and thinks they should just be ignored when discussing Christianity or politics.

  • Fundamentalist Evangelicals do have their version of FELD with the GOP, FELD shut down Ringling for one reason, they were irrelevant. No longer making a profit because circuses are no longer a relevant part of the American Entertainment Consumption. They were the big thing 100 years ago but are now just an afterthought. All this old time courtship rituals cannot survive the age of Tinder and Bumble. Once the GOP dumps them and goes lengths to get voters to forget they had anything to do with these groups is when they become dangerous, that is if they are not reduced to small groups living in rural ghettos, subsisting on government cheese and getting inebriated on Listerine and Inhaling Modelling Glue.

    This Botkin guy has this 200 year plan, how is that working out, His two daughters shilling for this movement are in their 30s and not married or looks like they are even close to it. His holy plan is crumbling into ash. Everything they do from quiverfull to the recent Nashville Declaration is desperate attempt to regain their relevancy, it will never happen as you stated more and more conservative christian groups are facing money problems, potential lawsuits those christian companies cannot even face the real captains of industry. The Silicon Valley Tech Titans. Bezos, Musk and Gates. All three have together have more wealth than many of these people combined.

    Bill Gates has a foundation that is promoting reproductive rights around the world, Bezos and Musk want to send people to Mars while Hobby Lobby is buying artifacts from ISIS to build a bible museum. One side is building the future while the other wants to prop up a crumbling past.

  • Astrin Ymris

    I hope that’s true! But… we still have to deal with the fact that Trump was elected on an essentially Facist White Supremacy platform. Yes, Hillary won the popular vote and it was only gerrymandering and unprecedented Russian hacking* which gave Trump the victory. Yet there were still a huge number of voters who were willing to buy what he was selling.

    *Which may have included voting machine hacking.

  • i looked more into this Botkin Courtship crap, and it really is more of lets prop up a 19th century custom in the name of tradition. That custom like the travelling animal circus thrived 100 years ago because people lived in more isolated rural areas. It was a environment where these traditions could survive. What ended courtship, Henry Ford and this product he rolled out called the Model T. It make people especially the youth more mobile. Circuses began their decline into irrelevancy in the 1950’s as more people became urban dwellers and new entertainment such as movies and then television became dominant. We were more fixated by Elvis, Marilyn and 4 guys from Liverpool were about to invade our shores.

    Ringling Bros became the 1st causality of the 21st century, if movies and TV slammed them the world of the internet and interactive entertainment took them down, with Christian Courtship it just cannot survive the age of Tinder and Bumble, the Botkin Sisters are 30, they are grown ass women who need their Daddy’s permission to date, even the most dedicated Evangelical Male do not want to deal with that hassle. They are now so involved that they cannot give it up, but even FELD knew when it was time to throw in the towel and shut the circus down.

    The entire evangelical movement, and all religions are fighting a battle with this most lethal and final foe. Irrelevancy. It is the foe that always vanquishes them.

  • lady_black

    Why would I even CARE if brown people have more babies?

  • lady_black

    Islam DOESN’T ban contraception.

  • lady_black

    I have no idea what you’re talking about.

  • lady_black

    That’s like saying if you have more than one child, you’re cheating the first one out of love. Or claiming you can only be a true friend to one friend.
    The thing I’ve discovered about my heart, through decades of life is that there’s always room for one more. Love doesn’t run out, and every bit of your heart that you give away is never lost. There’s always more where that came from.

  • gimpi1

    Damn good point. I hadn’t noticed that. Well spotted.

  • MuttsRule

    As soon as she has produced eight children, she will qualify for the Nazi Cross of Honor of the German Mother
    (Ehrenkreuz der Deutschen Mutter). Right now, she has only a silver cross. Sad!

  • Astrin Ymris

    Re: “…That’s like saying if you have more than one child, you’re cheating the first one out of love…”
    Very true! You’d think they’d be insisting on only children if they were being internally consistent.
    OTOH, given that husbands are equated to god stand-ins in this movement, maybe they consider having had more than one romance the equivalent of polytheism? ;-D

  • lady_black

    “Romance” doesn’t equal “husband.” Besides… what if you are widowed? No husband for the rest of your life? Ridiculous!